What version of the bible do you read and what one do you like best
- Thread starter ShowMercy
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I like the ESV myself. NASB also seems to be fine. I like the NIV for it's intended purpose, which is a thought-for-thought translation.
I have argued endlessly with KJV Onlyists who insist that you must use the KJV. Anymore nowadays, I just tell them to use it and leave me alone.
I've studied the different textual basis and agree that the modern translations are more reflective of the original text. Additionally, the "long ending" lacks credibility. Therefore, I'm convinced it was a later addition.
However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone. The ones that are most argumentative about it tend to be isolationists who are very self righteous.
I have argued endlessly with KJV Onlyists who insist that you must use the KJV. Anymore nowadays, I just tell them to use it and leave me alone.
I've studied the different textual basis and agree that the modern translations are more reflective of the original text. Additionally, the "long ending" lacks credibility. Therefore, I'm convinced it was a later addition.
However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone. The ones that are most argumentative about it tend to be isolationists who are very self righteous.
-
2
- Show all
When I said "long ending" what I mean is the long ending of Mark 16. Verses 9-20 are a later addition. Some groups won't accept that, though, because they base their theology on it. However, you won't see me handling snakes or drinking poison anytime soon, and some of the goofs that do those things end up in a grave.
-
1
- Show all
NASB = New American Standard Bible
I should have mentioned that. Very sorry
~Deut
p.s. - there is also the ASV/American Standard Version (a predecessor of the NASB 95'), and the NAB, the New American Bible, which is a modern Roman Catholic Bible that has nothing to do with the NASB translation, just FYI.
I should have mentioned that. Very sorry
~Deut
p.s. - there is also the ASV/American Standard Version (a predecessor of the NASB 95'), and the NAB, the New American Bible, which is a modern Roman Catholic Bible that has nothing to do with the NASB translation, just FYI.
No please don't feel sorry . Now I know what it is . Thank you for the answer back . Wow my head is spining . I had not known how many diffrent types of Bibles there are out there . This is some thing I really need to talk to my pastor about . Thank you for all your help
I see it differently than the longer ending of Mark is by far has a solid backup of Greek manuscripts, an ancient translation of Greek predating Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. and has many backings of the early church fathers. "However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone" unless one persists.
The earliest manuscripts do not contain these verses..therefore, this is an indication they were added later.
Additionally, Mark's book was meant to lead to the question, who is this man?
It is likely that the person who added these verses meant to harmonize Mark with the other gospels.
Additionally, I don't think the verses about drinking poison and picking up snakes were inspired, neither was Jesus appearing in a different form. The latter is used by Jehovah's Witnesses to deny the bodily resurrection.
Additionally, Mark's book was meant to lead to the question, who is this man?
It is likely that the person who added these verses meant to harmonize Mark with the other gospels.
Additionally, I don't think the verses about drinking poison and picking up snakes were inspired, neither was Jesus appearing in a different form. The latter is used by Jehovah's Witnesses to deny the bodily resurrection.
You can hold those views if you want. I don't think the facts bear it out. You might check the NET Study Bible for details on manuscript evidence. This study bible is very handy in that regard as it includes translation notes and makes comments about how the underlying Greek text varies from the Textus Receptus.
